Rush Limbaugh yesterday had the following to say about women serving in the US military:

So what does it tell you they of the military? Its nothing but a little social playground for experimentation, by the way since they’re liberals they’d love to weaken it and love to tear it apart and cause all kinds of controversy and strife, and they do it under the guise of women’s rights, I’m sure there are some imminently qualified women in the military I am not talking about their ability to do, I am talking about the institution and what it says about a cultured civilized society that it will
round up babes send them off to basic training and send them off to the foxholes. It can be done, but its not recommended.

Yup, those “babes” are “rounded up” and forced into the military. I have a niece in the army. She graduated from West Point with a degree in engineering (which is more than college dropout Limbaugh could ever do). She has served in Iraq (which is more than Vietnam-era Limbaugh did) and probably will be headed back there again. She’d also beat Limbaugh into a bloody pulp.

Are we going to hear the Right take down this idiot? Probably not.

I’m sure Mike Dunford would have something to say on this, considering his wife is a “babe” sent “off to the foxholes” in Iraq.

Comments

I probably not the only one of your readers who would pay to watch that. Though, as a liberal and a pacifist, I would be obligated to occasionally take a break from cheering her on to say, “tut-tut, this is awful; why doesn’t anyone do something to stop it.” Then I’d have anuther sip of my beer and go back to cheering her on.

“what it says about a cultured civilized society that it will round up babes send them off to basic training and send them off to the foxholes.”

Huh–this could be the most liberal statement he’s ever made, assuming by “babes” he means that it is deplorable to send young men and women fresh out of highschool off to fight an unjust war. Oh wait, it’s Limbaugh…”babes” are his enlightened reference to women. So, he saying “keep ’em off the battlefields and barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen”!

Women still aren’t allowed in combat, technically, though they often find themselves in harm’s way these days as the nature of fighting has changed.

BTW, when I was in the Air Force, I knew a slender redheaded marine chick who reminded me of the Terminator. Nice lithe exterior, but you got the distinct impression that if she turned on you, she’d cut out your heart and eat it while you watched.

The whole question is like the question of gays in the military. If they’ll do the job, I don’t give a rat’s ass about peripheral matters. I don’t care if they paint the tanks pink, every gay soldier is occupying a slot I don’t have to fill.

The last world war brought out the best in society. African Americans were allowed to fly combat planes, forming the famous Tuskegee Airmen. The Women’s Air Force Service Pilots (WASPS) flew fighters in training and ferry missions. With the end of WW2, woman and African American pilots were returned to society, making combat flying a white man’s game for decades. (Disclaimer: The author flew in combat planes along with other women aircrew.)

I’m increasingly convinced that Rush, like most opiate addicts, is probably a complete and total wuss when it comes to handling pain. It’s not that he’s incapable of withstanding the pain–he just shies away from anything that makes him at all uncomfortable. Thus, I submit that if he were to be placed in the same room with ten female boot camp graduates, and forced to talk to them, he would break down within an hour or so. That tough exterior would not last long.

As for the “little social playground,” I say that if someone wants to serve their country, we should give them an opportunity to try, be they gay, straight, male, female, white, black, etc. Some will make it, some won’t, but we will have a broad swath of civic-minded people ready to serve their nation. When and if they graduate, they will be as able to fight as anyone else.

Finally, forgive me for asking a rhetorical question: if Rush were around in 1948, do you think he would have criticized Truman’s desegregation of the military as a “social experiment”?

The hypocrisy of wretched blowhards like Limbaugh knows no bounds. He’s shamless, and a symbol (and proponent) of much that is wrong with this country. Too bad I’m preaching to the choir, and that anybody who doesn’t already agree with this assessment never will anyway. Sigh.

I still believe it’s a good thing to air this stuff out, though. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

I think all combat positions should be opened to women. No quotas or lower standards, just an equal chance for everyone. Perhaps very few women will attain such positions, but at least all women will at last have a real chance to be all they can be.

Limbaugh’s “toughness” reminds me of an experience I had in army basic training circa 1962. Coming from NYC I took basic at Ft. Dix in the swamps of South Jersey. Among my fellow trainees were a couple of young toughs from Brooklyn who let it be known they were in the Mafia (whether they were for sure I never found out). One tough just refused to do anything he was ordered, so he spent time in lock-up while awaiiting his dishonorable discharge.

The other guy figured he was real tough. I found out otherwise in two instances. In night navigation (where we were dropped off in the woods in the dark and had to negotiate our way through a swamp with waist deep water, ditches, woods and no lights to a specific point at a specific distance) he was petrified; to put him at ease I invited him to hold onto my shoulders the entire two miles in the dark. Then when faced with throwing a live hand grenade, he turned white as a sheet and refused to even touch it. The DI’s, having encountered this before were only too happy to oblige; the last thing they wanted was some joker dropping a live grenade at their feet out of sheer fear. Ever afterward I’ve always taken bar room bravado with a very large grain of salt.

I dare Rush Limbaugh to go up to, say, Jessica Lynch and say that. I remember the interview I saw with her. Maybe she was scared in combat; I bet a lot of guys are too. And it’s true her importance in the grand scheme of things was pumped up for propaganda purposes; she said as much. And yet, when she was interviewed, even despite her injuries, she was still a soldier every bit as much as a woman.

I’m sure she’d kick his ass even if she was still wheelchair bound (though I believe she gets around on just a leg brace these days, doesn’t she?).

I listened to Limbaugh on the radio once, back in 1988 or so. My husband was taking me out to lunch, and said “You have to hear this guy, he’s completely insane.” He turned on the radio, and there was Limbaugh, ranting about women in the military. I believe he claimed women would never make effective soldiers unless they were feminazi lesbians with PMS. He envisioned rotating platoons of terrifying PMS-enraged lesbians…at which point I told my husband to turn off the radio, since I had a headache.

Limbaugh is frightened of women, terrified of menstruation, and a real piece of work to boot. He should be ashamed of his comments.

one’s opinion is worth the expertise that is behind it, Rush has no credentials, academic or otherwise, and his opinions are therefore worth nothing. He is a very talented entertainer that fills some void in the lives of some very pathetic people.

Women still aren’t allowed in combat, technically, though they often find themselves in harm’s way these days as the nature of fighting has changed.

Absolutely not correct! This is one of the most common misconceptions about women in the military. The so-called “combat exclustion laws” only prohibited women in the Air Force and the Navy from being assigned to certain combat positions on aircraft and aboard ships. They never applied to women in the Army, and in any case, were repealed in the early 90’s. Full disclosure – I’m a retired female Army officer and was a combat arms officer for my entire career, from 1980 to 2006. Women’s assignments in the Army are governed only by Army policy. The only effect this policy ever had was to limit the career opportunities for women. It never prevented us from engaging in actual combat.

One thing I’ve noticed about Limbaugh – he always relies on the wingnut assumption that the military had to water down the standards so the “babes” could qualify. In fact, there is only one area in which the standards for men and women are different, and that’s the physical fitness test. The events on that test are designed to assess a person’s overall level of fitness. They are not related to anything we do in actual combat. When it comes to skills required in combat (M16 qualification, driving a HUMMV under fire, helicopter gunnery, etc.), ALL of the standards are completely gender neutral.

Oh, and that physical fitness test – since women were integrated into the Regular Army in 1978, we’ve raised the standards for both men and women three times. So much for women lowering the standards in the military.